Available in Russian
Author: Sergei Manzhosov
DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2025-2-177-200
Keywords: legal methodology; originalism; living constitution; historical school of law; legal dogmatics; Constitutional Court of Russia; Constitutional Conference; death penalty; right to life; natural law
Among Russian judges and legal scholars, the theory of the “living constitution”, which holds that the meaning of constitutional norms is determined by the contemporary context of their application, is considered self-evident. At one time, it became the dominant trend in American jurisprudence and spread to other legal systems as well. However, it is precisely in American law that this approach has recently come under serious criticism, resulting in an overruling of the long-standing practice of the U.S. Supreme Court regarding women’s right to abortion (a right that is now denied by the court). A crucial role in this process was played by the appointment of new judges during Donald Trump’s first presidency (2017–2021), who adhere to an alternative approach to interpretation, known as originalism. Originalist judges do not consider it possible to change the meaning of constitutional norms and believe that their true meaning is the one that was inherent to them originally, hence the need for historical knowledge that would help lawyers better understand the context in which the constitution was adopted. At first glance, such attention to history connects originalism with the historical school of law in continental jurisprudence. The article raises the question of to what extent this methodology of legal reasoning can be applied in Russian realities. To answer this question, it is necessary to assess, firstly, the effectiveness of the tools used by originalists, and secondly, their normative validity. According to the author, the materials of the Constitutional Commission and the Constitutional Conference represent a valuable historical source that allows one in some cases, for example, regarding the constitutionality of the death penalty, to establish the original meaning of the 1993 Constitution or at least the intent of its authors with a high degree of accuracy. Still, the justification for applying this methodology of interpretation is highly questionable, as it concerns human rights (in this case, the right to life). By their nature, as understood also by the Constitution’s authors, these are natural rights in the sense that they are objectively inherent to a person by virtue of being human, so they cannot be regarded as just another positive legal phenomenon akin to the rules governing the distribution of powers between state authorities or the like. As a result, traditional arguments in favor of originalism, which mainly appeal to the positive establishment of legal norms, do not hold up, or at least have less force in this context.
About the author: Sergei Manzhosov – Lecturer, Researcher, Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia .
Citation:
Manzhosov S. (2025) Smertnaya kazn' v Rossii v svete teoriy originalizma i zhivoy konstitutsii [The death penalty in Russia through the lens of the theories of originalism and living constitution]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.34, no.2, pp.177–200. (In Russian).
References
(2011) Stenogramma “kruglogo stola”, posvyashchennogo 20-letiyu uchrezhdeniya Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii (Moskva, Rossiyskaya akademiya pravosudiya, 15 dekabrya 2010 goda). Chast' 1 [Transcript of the round table dedicated to the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (Moscow, Russian Academy of Justice, December 15, 2010). Part 1]. Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya, no.1, pp.15–23. (In Russian).
(2024) V Gosdume zagovorili o peresmotre moratoriya na smertnuyu kazn'. Chto ob etom govoril Konstitutsionnyy sud i chto dumayut yuristy [The State Duma started talking about revising the moratorium on the death penalty. What the Constitutional Court said about it and what lawyers think]. BBC News. Russkaya sluzhba, 26 March. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/russian/articles/cxezdy0lr4go (accessed: 29.05.2025). (In Russian).
Alekseev S.S. (2016) U istokov Konstitutsii Rossii. Sub'ektivnye zametki [At the origins of the Constitution of Russia. Subjective notes]. In: Alekseev S.S. Izbrannoe [Selected works], Moscow: Statut, pp.15–55. (In Russian).
Alexy R. (2011) Ponyatie i deystvitel'nost' prava (otvet yuridicheskomu pozitivizmu) [Concept and validity of the law (an answer to legal positivism)], A.Laptev, F.Kalscheuer (transl.), Moscow, Berlin: Infotropik Media. (In Russian).
Andreevskiy I.E. (1866) Russkoe gosudarstvennoe pravo. Tom I: Vvedenie i Chast' I. O pravitel'stve [Russian state law. Vol.I. Introduction and Part I: On the government], Saint Petersburg; Moscow: Tipografiya M.O.Vol'fa. (In Russian).
Barnett R.E. (2004) Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Belov S. (2019) Tsennosti rossiyskoy Konstitutsii v tekste i v praktike eyo tolkovaniya [Values of the Russian Constitution in its text and in practice of its interpretation]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.28, no.4, pp.68–83. (In Russian).
Berlyavskiy L.G. (2013) Originalistskaya i nonoriginalistskaya kontseptsii konstitutsionnoy interpretatsii v SShA [Originalist and non-originalist conceptions of constitutional interpretation in the USA]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no.8, pp.101–108. (In Russian).
Brennan T. (1992) Natural Rights and the Constitution: The Original “Original Intent”. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, vol.15, no.3, pp.965–1030.
Brest P. (1980) The Misconceived Quest for the Original Understanding. Boston University Law Review, vol.60, no.2, pp.204–238.
Dolzhikov A. (2016) Tolkovanie konstitutsionnykh prav [Interpretation of constitutional rights]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.25, no.4, pp.125–151. (In Russian).
Filatov S.A., Chernomyrdin V.S., Shakhray S.M. et al. (eds.) (1995–1996) Konstitutsionnoe soveshchanie, 29 aprelya — 10 noyabrya 1993 g.: Stenogrammy. Materialy. Dokumenty [Constitutional Conference, April 29 — November 4, 1993: Transcripts. Materials. Documents], in 20 vols., Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura. (In Russian).
Von Gerber C.F. (1872) Über deutsches Recht und deutsche Rechtswissenschaft überhaupt. In: von Gerber C.F. Gesammelte juristische Abhandlungen. Bd.1, Jena: Mauke’s Verlag (Hermann Dufft), pp.1–35.
Gienapp J. (2021) Written Constitutionalism, Past and Present. Law and History Review, vol.39, no.2, pp.321–360.
Goldobina Z.G. (2007) Aktivizm i originalism v deyatel'nosti Verkhovnogo Suda SShA i v amerikanskoy politiko-pravovoy doktrine: Dis. … kand. yurid. nauk [Activism and originalism in the practice of the US Supreme Court and in the American political-legal doctrine: Cand. in law sci. diss.], Ekaterinburg. (In Russian).
Gritsenko E. (2011) Predely konstitutsionno-sudebnogo normotvorchestva [The boundaries of the Constitutional Court’s rulemaking]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.20, no.5, pp.107–130. (In Russian).
Hugo G. (1799) Lehrbuch eines civilistischen Cursus. Bd.I: Lehrbuch der juristischen Encyclopädie. Erste Abteilung: Privatrecht, 2nd ed., Berlin: August Mylius.
Ismailov R.R. (2018) Evolyutsiya originalistskoy teorii tolkovaniya konstitutsii v sovremennoy nauke konstitutsionnogo prava SShA [Evolution of the originalist theory of the interpretation of the constitution in the modern science of constitutional law of the USA]. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya, no.3, pp.79–86. (In Russian).
Jellinek G. (1913) Sistema sub'ektivnykh publichnykh prav. Vyp.1, A.A.Rozhdestvenskiy (transl.), Saint Petersburg; Moscow: Osvobozhdenie. (In Russian).
Kommers D.P., Miller R.A. (2012) The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany, 3rd ed., Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Langford C.L. (2018) Scalia v. Scalia: Opportunistic Textualism in Constitutional Interpretation, Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama Press.
Morshchakova T.G. (2008) Konstitutsionnye osnovy sudebnoy vlasti [Constitutional foundations of the judicial power]. In: Rumyantsev O.G. (ed.) Iz istorii sozdaniya Konstitutsii Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Konstitutsionnaya komissiya: stenogrammy, materialy, dokumenty (1990–1993 gg.). Tom 2: 1991 god [From the history of the creation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Constitutional Сommission: transcripts, materials, documents (1990–1993). Vol.2: 1991], in 6 vols., Moscow: Wolters Kluwer, pp.957–962. (In Russian).
Petrov A.A. (2022) Otmena obshchefederal'nykh garantiy prava na abort v SShA: Amerika na poroge konstitutsionnoy revolyutsii? [Removal of federal guarantees of the right to abortion in the US: is America on the verge of a constitutional revolution?]. Baikal Research Journal, no.4. (In Russian).
Romanovich-Slavatinskiy A.V. (1872) Posobie dlya izucheniya russkogo gosudarstvennogo prava po metodu istoriko-dogmaticheskomu. Vypusk 1 [Manual for studying Russian state law by the historical-dogmatic method. No.1], Kyiv: Universitetskaya tipografiya. (In Russian).
Rumyantsev O.G. (ed.) (2007–2008) Iz istorii sozdaniya Konstitutsii Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Konstitutsionnaya komissiya: stenogrammy, materialy, dokumenty (1990–1993 gg.) [From the history of the creation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Constitutional Commission: transcripts, materials, documents (1990–1993)], in 6 vols., Moscow: Wolters Kluwer. (In Russian).
Von Savigny F.С. (2011) Sistema sovremennogo rimskogo prava. T.I [System of the modern Roman law. Vol.1], G.Zhigulin (transl.), O.Kutateladze, V.Zubar' (eds.), Moscow: Statut. (In Russian).
Scalia A. (1989) Originalism: The Lesser Evil. Cincinnati Law Review, vol.57, no.3, pp.849–865.
Scalia A. (1997) Common-Law Courts in a Civil-Law System: The Role of United States Federal Courts in Interpreting the Constitution and Laws. In: Gutmann A. (ed.) A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law: An Essay by Antonin Scalia, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp.3–48.
Scalia A. (2008) Foreword. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, vol.31, no.3, pp.871–873.
Shaman J.M. (2010) The End of Originalism. San Diego Law Review, vol.47, no.1, pp.83–108.
Strauss D.A. (2010) The Living Constitution, New York: Oxford University Press.
Taranovskiy F.V. (1905) Istoricheskoe proiskhozhdenie yuridicheskoy shkoly nemetskikh gosudarstvovedov [Historical origins of the juridical school of German constitutional lawyers]. Vestnik prava, no.12, pp.1–10. (In Russian).
Taranovskiy F.V. (1907) Istoricheskoe i metodologicheskoe vzaimootnoshenie istorii, dogmy i politiki prava [Historical and methodological interrelation between history, dogma and politics of law]. Zhurnal Ministerstva yustitsii, no.3, pp.151–170. (In Russian).
Tiunova L.B., Belov E.M. (2009) K proektu Konstitutsii Rossiyskoy Federatsii [On the draft Constitution of the Russian Federation]. In: Rumyantsev O.G. (ed.) Iz istorii sozdaniya Konstitutsii Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Konstitutsionnaya komissiya: stenogrammy, materialy, dokumenty (1990–1993 gg.). Tom 5: Al'ternativnye proekty Konstitutsii Rossiyskoy Federatsii (1990–1993 gg.) [From the history of the creation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Constitutional Commission: transcripts, materials, documents (1990–1993). Vol.5: Alternative drafts of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (1990–1993)], in 6 vols., Moscow: Wolters Kluwer, pp.899–908. (In Russian).
Varol O.O. (2011) The Origins and Limits of Originalism: A Comparative Study. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, vol.44, no.5, pp.1239–1297.
Vas'kovskiy E.V. (1913) Rukovodstvo k tolkovaniyu i primeneniyu zakonov: dlya nachinayushchikh yuristov [A guidebook to interpretation and application of laws: for aspiring lawyers], Moscow: Br. Bashmakovy. (In Russian).
Vitruk N.V. (2012) K voprosu o “zhivom konstitutsionalizme” v kontekste sootnosheniya Konstitutsii i politiki [On “living constitutionalism” in the context of the relationship between the Constitution and politics]. In: Avak'yan S.A. (ed.) Konstitutsionnoe pravo i politika: sbornik materialov Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii. Yuridicheskiy fakul'tet MGU imeni M.V.Lomonosova, 28–30 marta 2012 goda [Constitutional law and politics: collection of materials of the international scientific conference. Faculty of Law, Lomonosov Moscow State University, March 28–30, 2012], Moscow: Yurist, pp.72–80. (In Russian).
Whittington K.E. (1999) Constitutional Interpretation: Textual Meaning, Original Intent, and Judicial Review, Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
Zaytsev V. (2025) “Po pros'bam trudyashchikhsya”. Pochemu Stalin snachala otmenil, a potom vernul kazn' v SSSR [“By the request of the working people”. Why Stalin first abolished and then returned the death penalty to the USSR]. Gazeta.Ru, 12 January. Available at: https://www.gazeta.ru/science/2025/01/12/20359814.shtml (accessed: 29.05.2025). (In Russian).